Prince Andrew continues to receive taxpayer-funded police protection

[Meanderings]

Prince Andrew continues to receive taxpayer-funded police protection

Archive link below.

t.co/QbBk9ZK6sH

Must be nice.

I guess the lesson here is pay £12 million to a woman who accused you of rape and you claim to never have met to retain your tax payer funded security.

Others have to fight for the privilege to pay their own way in court.

Happy Friday.

Historically yes, there have been. But people have been also convicted recently for breaking into royal palace areas (Windsor Castle where the Queen is and Royal Lodge where Andrew is) too.

We don’t know what level of threats and plots that the intelligence services know about against any of the family - it’s likely that what becomes publicly known is just the tip of the iceberg. The committee’s job is to assess the level of risk, which will change from time to time, and decide on security needs based on that. All we know is that their current assessment is that Andrew’s level of risk is high enough to warrant security, and the last time Harry was in the UK and carrying out private engagements, his wasn’t.

(my phone autocorrected Royal Lodge to Royal Sludge just then - seems quite apt! 😀)

@Serenster the question is, why on earth wouldn't Harry quality for protection if ANDREW does? Neither are 'working' ( lol) royals

This was answered in the preliminary ruling in Harry’s judicial review case against the Home Office - see the link below.

RAVEC allocate security based in three tiers:

1. To some persons as a matter of course, regardless of threat level, because of the position they hold.


2. If determined proportionate based on both the likelihood and impact of a threat.


3. On a case by case basis.

The Queen and Prince Charles obviously fall under category 1. Interestingly the judgment makes clear that, even before he left, Harry only had security under category 2 - he never had security as a matter of course. And now, as others have said, the current level of threats against Andrew are obviously greater than those against Harry. This will doubtless change over time, but for now that must be the situation.

www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Duke-of-Sussex-v-Home-Secretary-judgment-220722.pdf

So we have a situation where Andrew is still having his protection paid for by the taxpayer ( there was talk in Jan that Andrew would have to pay for his own protection- that just 'went away') and Harry is denied protection .

Harry has offered to pay for his family's protection and that is with the courts .

Take it up with the idiots who are threatening Andrew Novella4 - they are the ones to blame, no-one else!

I doubt they are the only ones to blame ...

Harry asked if his threat has gone down, he was told no.

Edward Young sits for the RF in RAVEC. He decided that Harry should not be offered security. He is also the man who refused for Harry to meet the queen despite it being her who asked him to come.

Harry also sent an email to EY saying, ok we will pay for the security - you can pay despite it being shouted from the rooftops that you can't, that is how Kate Moss wedding / football matches etc. are policed. On that note, you can also pay for NHS, that is how we do it, via medical insurance and you get moved up the queue fast.

Harry is currently disputing that Edward Young has a nefarious agenda towards him and his wife. Things were ticking along fine, before Charles shoehorned this man in 2017, when the then HMQ man - Sir Christopher was shoved off and replaced by EY.

Harry has offered to pay for his own security

I'm aware he's making a huge thing of this, but thought it had come out that no offer had been made to the people concerned - at least, not before he brought his latest legal case?

Yes, @Puzzledandpissedoff , the court filings clearly showed that Harry only offered to pay after he’d already started the litigation seeking to make RAVEC change their decision

On that note, you can also pay for NHS, that is how we do it, via medical insurance and you get moved up the queue fast.

Yes you can choose to pay for private health insurance if you don’t want to wait for the NHS or want services they don’t provide. Just like a Harry can choose to pay for his own private security…

The fact remains that Harry has offered to pay.

It's a bit rich that Andrew is still having the taxpayer cough up for his security !

Thank you, Serenster; I was sure I'd read something about it but couldn't remember the details

Frankly, since offering to the people concerned seems the obvious thing to do right at the start, this sounds to me like another case of Harry going off on one without considering all the details - or perhaps his background as a RF finger-clicker led him to think this would continue indefinitely?

If the tax payer is paying for Andrew after the complete disgrace of his past - one can hardly blame Harry for thinking he would be entitled to security when in the uk.

Puts a bit spotlight on Andrew and the rest of the freeloaders now that Harry has offered to pay

It's a bit rich that Andrew is still having the taxpayer cough up for his security

It certainly is, so since he's no longer a working royal I'd have thought the obvious answer would be to oblige him to pay for his own private security ... except I doubt mummy would wear that

Edward Young sits for the RF in RAVEC. He decided that Harry should not be offered security

Exactly this. He obviously loathes Harry for leaving and will do everything in his power to not give an inch. Maybe when the Queen dies, he'll be out of a job.

Bottom line for me is.... they are both disgraced non-working members of the RF. They should either both get it or neither get it.
Andrew is obviously disgraced because of well...everything, Harry is disgraced because he left.

Andrew's costs us a fortune day in day out. Harry's will probably be at most once a year and will be nothing like the bill for Andrew.
I think it's appalling that Harry doesn't get it. And I've thought that from Day One.

Just like a Harry can choose to pay for his own private security..

They won't be armed though. That's the whole argument. He can't bring his own security from US with their firearms, nor hire a private UK security firm with firearms. That's the difference. The Met/PPO's are armed.

He obviously loathes Harry for leaving and will do everything in his power to not give an inch. Maybe when the Queen dies, he'll be out of a job.

Do you know this man personally then Roussette?

I have never understood how people feel it’s totally acceptable to be so very judgmental and personally critical of private individuals who they know nothing about (also Jason Knauf, Angela Kelly) who have absolutely no right of reply and who get dragged into these shenanigans.

Do you know this man personally then Roussette?

Why do you say that? I'm obviously only expressing an opinion, so your silly 'do you know him' goes nowhere. You have your opinions. I have mine.

He has blocked Harry's security and tried to or has blocked him from seeing his Grandmother.

p.s. I doubt Angela Kelly and Jason Knauf are worried about a forum where individuals discuss them, and they won't feel the need to come on and reply. I can't believe you never criticise anyone either.
That is what forums are for - expressing opinions. Please leave me to express mine.

@Serenster

There's a lot more to it than you seem to think

www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1654057/queen-elizabeth-ii-aide-prince-harry-interview-tensions-sir-edward-young-monarch-update/amp

www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/prince-harry-suffers-a-win-and-a-loss-in-his-police-security-case-against-uk-government/D5MCEDHMIU2LBKKVRRQSRZFKZ4/?outputType=amp

I wonder if the public will be shown the criteria that passed Andrew to have continued tax payer paid security but Harry not?

I wonder if the public will be shown the criteria that passed Andrew to have continued tax payer paid security but Harry not?

I don’t need to wonder, because we won’t. That kind of confidential information was heard in private in the judicial review hearing and redacted from the judgment, even though it is relevant to the issues.

Of course we can't expect a list of names / threats - don't be ridiculous.

Do they expect us to believe it's completely impossible to list the criteria ?

Another absolute disgrace that tax payers are paying for Andrew .

Maybe when the Queen dies, he'll be out of a job.

I shudder at the thought, but I wouldn't be too sure @Roussette . He was pushed in by Charles. Maybe he will find a place for him in his new administration.

My view on the whole thing is that Sir Christopher - who is accredited with modernising the royals - was probably pushed out for being too honest and would not have had the stomach for all this H&M smear going around. Under him KM was protected before her marriage, and so were several people. To me that sounds like having the queen and rf best interest at heart.

Now you have gladiator style of dirty fighting, with one particular royal targeted. A bloody mess.

But my feeling is that he knows too much and too many skeletons, so will hold that against PC and carry on just like Jason Knauf.

@notanotheroneagain

It will be interesting when Charles becomes Monarch. It's going to be like the whole pack of cards thrown up in the air, and being laid down again. .

This is interesting...
As Private Secretary, Young is a member of the so-called 'golden triangle' of senior British officials – the others being the Cabinet Secretary and the Principal Private Secretary to the Prime Minister – with key responsibilities in the event of a hung parliament in the United Kingdom

He has been a PS and Adviser to various members of the Government in the past, perhaps he'll go back to that!

He can't be doing it for the money, given his previous roles in Banking, but he has received five honours, perhaps that's his thing.

Does anyone think Liz Truss is remotely bothered by 'the Andrew situation'?

I may be incorrect, but I thought there is no mechanism for a private person to pay for personal protection from the UK police force. I understood that was one of the reasons it was rejected and the protection would be decided on an as needs basis, which would then be at the taxpayers expense.

Same here. But he's bringing a court case?

There's a fairly good explanation of it all here, SpinCityBlues: www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jul/22/prince-harry-case-against-home-office-can-proceed-high-court-judge-rules

Strictly speaking it seems to be the process by which RAVEC made their decision Harry's challenging, presumably in an attempt to get it declared wrong so he can ask again for automatic security (as opposed to on a case-by-case basis)

What confuses me though is that they could change the process to allow Harry to "make respresentations" beforehand, or even ban anyone he doesn't like from the committee, but I wouldn't expect that to guarantee a different decision in the end?